The competition for the building of the Palace of Soviets (1932) launched the search for a new Soviet style in architecture, however, taking them away from the avant-garde, he did not limit them to authentic classics. In the first half of the 1930s, domestic architects and customers were interested in the development of architecture abroad, innovations of the 1910s era. And it is precisely in pre-revolutionary architecture that the birth of architectural techniques of the interwar period, tangibly characteristic of the era of the 1920s and 1930s, is already evident, the opposition of decorative and ascetic architecture. [1] In the same years, with the construction of the House of the German Embassy, which opened the geometrization of the classical order (and clearly predicted the aesthetics of the 1930s), fantasy, close to Art Deco details of the house of the Bassein Partnership were drawn. [2] The purpose of this article is to try to outline the range of monuments of early domestic Art Deco and to analyze the motives for the geometrization of the order of the 1910-1930s. The result of these trends will be I. A. Fomin and V. A. Shchuko, who started the construction of two iconic structures in 1928 - the house of the Dynamo society and the building of the Library named after IN AND. Lenin in Moscow.
After the competition for the Palace of Soviets (1932), Soviet architecture developed already taking into account pre-revolutionary architecture, and this was not only Palladianism or an appeal to the Behrens order, but interest in all architecture of the 1910s, domestic and foreign. The enlargement of the architectural form and the geometrization of details, the aesthetics of the brutal and the experiment of early Art Deco - all this could be used in the era of “mastering the classical heritage”. And the first examples of plastic fantasy and geometrization (and hence Art Deco) in Russian architecture do not date back to the 1930s, but to the 1910s, when such a simplification of decor had not yet been dictated by political conjuncture or economics.
The innovations of the early Art Deco of the 1910s did not go back to traditional European languages (medieval and classical) or floristic Art Nouveau, it was a varied plastic experiment, disinterested form-creation, and such are the works of not only Saarinen. And although before the First World War there were still few solid Art Deco samples (more often they were individual parts), the more valuable such finds are. [3] So, the features of early Art Deco can be caught in the masterpieces of St. Petersburg architecture - the house of the Bassein Partnership (1912), with geometrized and exquisitely painted decor, as well as the New Passage shopping arcade (1912), the entrance portals of which are easy to imagine created in New York in the 1920s.
The First World War, and the subsequent revolution in Russia, seemed to irresistibly separated two periods of stylistic development of Russian architecture. [4] The pre-revolutionary culture with its complex plastic fantasy could no longer be inherited by the Soviet era. However, the experience of the geometrization of decor was learned. Thus, the masterpiece of the early Art Deco of St. Petersburg was the house of N. P. Semenov (SG Ginger, 1914), and the motif of his fluted balcony got into the facades of six buildings in the 1930s. [5] In the pre-revolutionary years, this was a surge of playful decorativeism, ready to turn into art deco, but not fully realizing its potential. So, the facade of the Burtsev house (1912) sharply juxtaposed simplified and exquisitely designed details, the end face of the von Hooke house (1912) was decided on the contrast of a geometrized niche and a vase, stepped brackets. [6] After the revolution, Russian architecture could no longer be so elegant, but aspired to this despite the typification, which increased its pressure on the masters in the 1930s-1950s.
Soviet architecture of the 1920s-1930s already embodied the proletarian spirit of the era, and the coarseness and simplicity of its forms became the answer to social and economic shocks. However, what force forced the simplification of the monuments of the 1910s? These were the cubic brackets of R. I. Bernstein (1910) and the house of the Bassein partnership (1912), a small order without bases and capitals in a whole series of works by A. F. Bubyr, stepped brackets and bases of bay windows of the house of K. I. Kapustina (1910). Various geometrized details, caisson windows and an order without bases and capitals - all these devices of the future style of the 1930s appear even before the First World War. [7] However, these were innovations of European architecture and the motives for their appearance were abstract, visual. It was the impact of a global style trend - geometrization of architectural form.
The breadth of the style spectrum of the 1910s-1930s is somehow announced by the house of R. A. Diederichs in St. Petersburg (1912), its facade sharply juxtaposes the brutal and graceful, rustic and authentic order. Thus, in the 1920s and 1930s, the order component of the “proletarian classics” went back to the ancient tradition, and the methods of geometrization - to the innovations at the turn of the 1900s –1910s, the first examples of Art Deco.
The culmination of the development of the Art Deco style was the skyscrapers of America, but its key techniques - geometrization and passion for archaism - appeared for the first time even before the First World War. Such were the buildings of Sullivan and Wright, the ribbed stupid towers of Saarinen, the works of J. Hoffmann (Stoclet Palace, 1905) and O. Perret (Theater on the Champs Elysees, 1913). [8] This was the circle of monuments of early Art Deco (protoardeco) - this was the second round of renewal of the architectural language after Art Nouveau, a form of searching for an alternative to the authentic classics. [9]
Common to the two periods, separated by the First World War, is the use of a geometrized order. In the 1920s-1930s, craftsmen began to return to the colonnades of the house of the German Embassy (P. Behrens, 1911) and the Berlin People's Theater (O. Kaufmann, 1914), the anta porticoes of the Hall in Hellerau (G. Tessenov, 1910) and the Austrian pavilion in Rome (J. Hoffman, 1910). [10] And this was not an accidental, but a natural continuation of the work interrupted by the First World War. After its completion, the craving for visual renewal, simplification of the architectural language combined with the economy of the interwar era and a distinct interest in the archaic - the ascetic order of the ancient Egyptian temple of Hatshepsut, the unique sculpture of the Baker's tomb in Rome, as a kind of pre-classical proto-order. [11]
The skyscrapers of the United States became the symbol of the era of the 1920s and 1930s, but they were involved in the orbit of Art Deco and order architecture. The monumentality of the works of Fomin, Levinson and Shchuko (and their Italian colleagues) gave the asceticism of their works a distinct shade of archaism. And the monuments of the 1930s found the necessary imperial origins in Egyptian temples. The fluted pilasters of the 1910s and 1930s also go back to the archaic experience. [12] So the ancient architecture contributed to the renewal or, more precisely, the archaization of the order. And it is precisely this neoarchaism that brings the geometrized order of the 1910s-1930s closer to the style of skyscrapers.
The pavilions of the 1925 exhibition in Paris were extremely diverse, and if the first of them influenced the style of American skyscrapers, the latter embodied a new interpretation of the order. [13] The Grand Palais staircase at the exhibition in Paris in 1925 (architect S. Letrosne) was solved by an elongated anta order and, going back to the innovations of Hoffman and Perret, undoubtedly formed the style of the library. IN AND. Lenin. The bas-relief frieze of the Shchuko portico echoed another pavilion of the exhibition - the House of the Collector P. Patou. [14] And it is the international interest of the interwar period in the warrant of the 1910s, embodied in the pavilions of the 1925 exhibition in Paris, that allows us to consider the works of Fomin and Schuko, Langbard and Levinson (and the architects Mussolini), not only as a national phenomenon, but as a manifestation of a large wave of stylistic changes - geometrization of the architectural form, and it began to operate before and in addition to the revolution of 1917 [15] Such was the order in the works of Hoffman, Tessenov, Behrens and Perret, and it was these innovations of the 1910s that played the role of "proletarian classics" in the works of the masters of the Leningrad school. [16]
In 1928, a style experiment began in the very center of Moscow - the construction of an order that was authentic, geometrized and interpreted in Art Deco. The building of the State Bank, the house "Dynamo" and the library. IN AND. Lenin was represented by three versions of the state style, and the era of the 1930s will be held in their fierce competition. And in comparison with authentic neoclassicism, the facades of the library to them. IN AND. Lenin show Shuko's frank transition to a different style - Art Deco. [17] However, what place does the geometrized order of the Dynamo house take on the style map of the 1920s and 1930s? This difference, which is obvious between the pre-revolutionary neoclassicism and the innovations of Fomin in 1928, requires terminological fixation.
The movement of the pendulum between the two poles of extreme decorativeness and uncompromising asceticism, twice during the period in the 1910-1930s, passed an intermediate interstyle stage, when the order, monumentality had not yet been completely abandoned, but a full-fledged classical decor was already absent. [18] This stage, it seems, has its own meaning, not reducible either to simplified neoclassicism or to the emerging avant-garde. This stage must find its name, chronological and stylistic. The architecture of the 1930s is represented by a wide range of diverse trends - from the neo-Renaissance to the “ribbed style”. Among them was the neoclassical branch of Art Deco, examples of which can be found in Rome and Paris, Leningrad and Moscow. [19]
Fomin's works at the turn of the 1920s and 1930s seemed to be the clearest embodiment of the "proletarian classics." However, in this style, it is rather obvious not a connection with the classical tradition, but a deliberate distance from it. The bulk of this architecture (seemingly the product of the proletarian revolution) was implemented in Italy. Architects Mussolini, in the same years as Fomin, with amazing consistency implemented this dual aesthetics, created at the intersection of the classic and avant-garde. [20] The result of these efforts was the controversial style of the EUR ensemble. However, this aesthetics was as far from the classics as the revolutionary sculpture of her first masterpiece, the Baker's tomb, was from the complex decorativeness of the Roman forum.
The interstyle geometrized order of the 1910-1930s (for example, in the portico of the rectorate of the Rome University of Piacentini, 1933) no longer contained a priori features of the classics - the plastic motifs of antiquity and the Renaissance. Deprived of its canonical appearance and charm, it carried a completely different, non-classical “visual vibration”. The motives of neoarchaic and avant-garde are more palpable in it. And it is precisely this duality that brings such an order closer to the style of American skyscrapers - Art Deco. The distance in the geometrization of architectural form that was traversed in the sculpture of the Chrysler Building in relation to the Gothic, it seems, was overcome by the architects of the 1930s in relation to the classical order.
The elongated colonnades of the Moscow house "Dynamo" and the Leningrad House of Soviets, it would seem, in an obvious way go back to one source - the granite creation of Behrens. However, the house "Dynamo" was not his direct quote, he embodied the already radical geometrization of the classical form, and at the same time openly declared the second, even more ancient primary source - the Roman tomb of the Baker (this was its difference from the portico of Piacentini). This allowed Fomin to create a uniquely complex stylistic fusion, a monumental monument - both equidistant from constructivism, neoclassicism and art deco, and at the same time associated with them.
The main features of Art Deco in architecture - the geometrization of historicism forms, plastic and compositional neoarchaism, duality (i.e. work at the intersection of tradition and avant-garde, scenery and asceticism), appeal to the innovations of the 1910s - were also characteristic of the style of American skyscrapers. and for the geometrized order of the 1910-1930s. This allows us to consider a significant part of the order architecture of the 1910-1930s not as a simplified, "disfigured" classics, but to see in it some new content - the neoclassical branch of Art Deco, understanding by Art Deco not only the "ribbed style" of high-rise buildings, but a wide range of compromises between the poles of authentic classics and avant-garde abstraction.
The neoclassical branch of Art Deco unites a whole layer of monuments of the 1910-1930s, created at the intersection of styles, or more precisely, between their epicenters. And it is the term "Art Deco" that indicates in their relation both to the years of creation and to the method of transformation of the original stylistic motive. For example, the knot of a fluted pilaster without a capital in combination with a cornice simplified to one large profile, used in the works of Fomin, was close to the experiments of J. Hoffmann - the Austrian pavilions in Rome (1910) and Cologne (1914), the Villa Primavezi in Vienna (1913). With this method Fomin decides - the Polytechnic Institute in Ivanovo-Voznesensk (1928), the Moscow Institute of Land Management (1934), the interior of the Sverdlova Square metro station (now Teatralnaya, 1936).
The geometrization of historicism forms, as a key technique of the Art Deco style, was characteristic of both American skyscrapers and order architecture of the 1910-1930s. Only the Gothic towers or the archaic pyramids began to be geometrized, but the classical order, and therefore its capitals and cornices became simpler or disappeared altogether. This transformation in the spirit of Art Deco was varied - from luxurious (library named after VI Lenin) to ascetic (house "Dynamo"). However, this group of monuments also had the most important unifying principle - the rejection of the classical order canon and often even the very monumentality, the introduction of fantastically geometrized details. This is how the numerous buildings in Italy of the Mussolini era, the pavilions built in Paris for the 1937 exhibition were solved. [21] The pinnacle of the Leningrad Art Deco was the work of E. A. Levinson. [22]
A feature of the 1920-1930s era is the variety and abundance of interstyle trends and monuments, such were the skyscrapers of America and the geometrized order of the 1910-1930s. It was a deliberate work at the junction of neoarchaic and avant-garde, tradition (a priori decorative) and a new, extremely abstract form, the symbol of such a compromise was the house of "Dynamo" Fomin (1928) and the Palace of Civilization in Rome (1939). Let us emphasize that it was precisely the interstyle monuments and movements that were the most popular and successful in the 1920s and 1930s, as it was in Europe (Italy), the USSR and the USA. The compromise of tradition and innovation was able to satisfy the majority.
The results of the competition for the Palace of Soviets (1932-1934), or rather, their dual nature, made it possible to interpret the task of "mastering the classical heritage" in different ways. In 1934, Fomin performed at the competition of the People's Commissariat of Heavy Industry (NKTP) with a revolutionary style in graphics and dual in architectural concept. Its difference from authentic neoclassicism is quite obvious, it is it that constitutes the main content there. In the mid-1930s, this style was implemented in a number of Moscow buildings, such were those designed by L. V. Rudnev back in 1933 - the building of the Academy of the RKKA. M. V. Frunze and the People's Commissariat of Defense on Arbatskaya. [23] These buildings are usually considered as examples of the so-called. totalitarian architecture. However, the plastic techniques of this style, the geometrized order and the window-caissons appear for the first time in the practice of the European masters of the 1910-1920s - G. Vago and O. Perret. And Fomin manages to surpass them in his version of the NKTP. [24] In its grandeur of scale and monumentality, it was comparable only to the projects of E. L. Bulle. [25]
Fomin's works at the turn of the 1920s and 1930s obviously embodied a stylistic compromise. [26] However, in its most striking, concentrated form, Fomin's style of those years was able to convince and rule over space. This was the project of the NKTP, and artistic luck, expressiveness and success were embodied in it with rare power. And the principle of this new style in the formulation of Fomin was as follows - "unity, strength, simplicity, standard, contrast and novelty" [10, p. 205]. And this is exactly the impression that the skyscrapers and the works of the Third Workshop of the Moscow City Council directed by Fomin make. [27]
Fomin's innovation was the contrasting combination of geometrized details and the neoclassical motif of giant arches, plastic techniques of the 1910s and the image of the Basilica of Maxentius. This allowed Fomin to compete with both the "ribbed style" and the neo-Renaissance. And perhaps the master even surpassed Zholtovsky in their correspondence rivalry. So the interstyle geometrized order allowed Fomin both to express his time and give an answer to the innovations of pre-revolutionary Petersburg.
For the Leningrad architectural school, the era of the 1930s was a period of real prosperity, and its masters showed themselves in both neoclassicism and art deco. In 1933 V. A. Shchuko and V. G. Gelfreich joined B. M. Iofan and begin work on the project of the Palace of Soviets, as the tallest building in the world. And in the first years after the victory of the "ribbed style" at the competition of the Palace of Soviets in Russian architecture, there is an explosive interest in plastic experiment (Art Deco). However, it lasted only two or three years, by 1936 the tastes of the authorities were becoming more conservative (in 1937 the journal Architecture Abroad was closed). [28]
I. A. Fomin, after his triumphant participation in the NKTP competition (1934), returns to the motives of brutal neoclassicism, his passion for the Roman Porta Maggiore and his pre-revolutionary project of the Nikolaevsky railway station (1912) - this is how his grandiose rusticated facade of the SNK Ukrainian SSR house in Kiev will be solved. In the same 1936, at the competition of the Leningrad House of Soviets, the monumental version of N. A. Trotsky, it was decided by the giant order of P. Behrens and the rusticum of the Mikhailovsky Castle. This was the answer of Soviet architects to the classical images and innovations of pre-revolutionary Petersburg. And it was in the era of the 1900-1910s that the stylistic tendencies of the interwar period - the geometrization and monumentalization of the architectural form - found their origins. Such was the retrospectiveness of the two trends of the 1930s era - neoclassicism and art deco.
[1] Already in the work of masters at the turn of the century, floristic details coexist with geometrized ones. And if the mansion of S. P. Ryabushinsky (1900) became a masterpiece of Art Nouveau, then the mansion of A. I. Derozhinskaya (1901) already contains features close to Art Deco. A similar "bilingualism" can be noted in Otto Wagner, as the masterpiece of early Art Deco in Vienna was the Church of Am Steinhof (1903). [2] Facades of the grandiose house of the Bassein partnership, started by E. F. Virrikh and A. I. Zazersky, were executed, as indicated by V. G. Lisovsky and R. M. Gachot, the creative duet of A. F. Bubyr and N. V. Vasilyeva. [5, p. 190] [3] In St. Petersburg, some geometrized and close to Art Deco details can be found in the building - the Second Mutual Credit Society (Lidval, 1907), the House of Educational Institutions (Dmitriev, 1911), KI Kapustin's apartment buildings (1907), Bernstein (1910), M. A. von Hooke (1912), A. E. Burtseva (1912), F. M. and M. M. Bogomoltsev (1912), EP Mikhailova (1913), AL Sagalova (1913), NP Semenova (1914) and others [4] The grandiose difference between pre-revolutionary and Soviet architecture was the result of not only style changes, but post-revolutionary emigration and the sad step of generational change. In 1916 M. M. dies. Peretyatkovich, after the revolution the leaders of Petersburg architecture - F. I. Lidval, M. S. Lalevich and N. V. Vasiliev (will work in the USA), his co-author A. F. Bubyr dies in 1919 [5] And it was in the 1930s that the fluted balcony of N. P. Semenova is gaining unexpected popularity. So in Leningrad it is used by E. A. Levinson (in a residential building on Karpovka, 1931-1934 and the Lensovet House of Culture, 1931-38), V. O. Munts (in a residential building on Lev Tolstoy Street, 1934), L. E. Ass and A. S. Grinzberg (residential building on Ligovsky prospect, 1935) A. A. Ol (in a residential building on Tkachey Street, 1936), as well as D. D. Bulgakov in Moscow (in a house on the Garden Ring, 1935). Note that the fate of S. G. Ginger ended tragically, in 1933 he was arrested and shot in 1937. [6] Stepped brackets of the house of S. М. Lipavsky (1912) and von Hooke (1912) were the answer to the corresponding details of the Suomi Bank in Helsinki (A. Lindgren, 1911). [7] In Moscow, the building of the Northern Insurance Society (1909), the House of the Moscow Merchant Society (1912), the building of the Stroganov workshops (1914), etc. were solved with a fantasy-geometrized order. [8] architects, E. Saarinen's colleagues - S. Lindqvist (Building of the City Electric Company, 1909 and Villa Ensi, 1910 in Helsinki, Town Hall in Mikkeli, 1910), A. Lindgren (the luxurious building of the Suomi Bank in Helsinki, 1912), L. Sonka (Kalio church, 1908 and stock exchange building, 1910 in Helsinki), V. Penttilä (bank building in Lahti, 1913), etc.[9] And samples of early Art Deco were not inferior in wealth to the pavilions of the 1925 exhibition, and such is not only the work of J. Hoffman or F. L. Wright, but objects in various cities of Europe. These are, for example, the Teitz shopping gallery in Dusseldorf (J. M. Olbrich, 1909), the Sheepworthhouse in Amsterdam (Van der Mei, 1910), etc. An amazing layer of early Art Deco in Milan is formed by the gravestones of the 1900-10s in the central cemetery and the grandiose railway station, begun by W. Stacchini in 1912. [10] Antovy order was also carried out in the works of Behrens (Continental AG factory in Hannover, 1912), Bonatza (station in Stuttgart, from 1914). O. Wagner was one of the first to use the anta order, however, in the master's projects (the Vienna monuments at Karlplatz, 1905 and near the city museum, 1909), he did not yet have a special, non-tectonic elongation. In 1912, Wagner realizes his vision of such a geometrized but harmonious order in the portico of his villa in Vienna. [11] We emphasize that the motives for geometrization could be both archaic and avant-garde. And the first monument in which these ideas were combined was Wright's Unity Temple in Chicago (1906), this was an amazingly artistic example of early Art Deco. [12] The channeled pilasters without bases and capitals of the 1910-1930s went back not so much to the classical tradition as to the archaic - the temples of Persepolis, Babylon, Egypt, and first appeared in the works of Hoffman (Villa Primavezi in Vienna, 1913, pavilion in Cologne, 1914). In the 1920s-1930s, these were the individual works of I. A. Fomin, the Leningrad buildings of L. V. Rudnev (Textile Institute, 1929), N. A. Trotsky (dwelling house on Stachek Square, 1934) and others. [13] Note that neoclassical motifs were characteristic not only of the Collector's House, as one of the most exquisite and luxurious pavilions of the 1925 exhibition, but also of the works of recognized masters new style - J. E. Rulman (furniture and interiors of the "House of the Collector"), G. Ponti (vases in the pavilion of Italy), Tamara de Lempitskaya (Tuileries Salon and Women's Salon). [14] The small order of the Patu pavilion, reproducing the order of the Baker's tomb, was not similar in proportion to the grandiose columns of the house of the "Dynamo" society of Fomin, but again, after a long pause, recalled the innovations of the 1910s and their historical origins, the art of the archaic. A similar round, tubistic order without bases and capitals was acquired by the buildings of I. G. Langbard - Central House of Officers (1934) and the building of the Academy of Sciences (1935) in Minsk. [15] Antoye porticos acquired - the house of the Central Executive Committee and the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR (architects D. M. and B. M. Iofana, 1927), the Dynamo stadium (architect A. Ya. Langman, 1928), the House of Culture of the Pravda publishing house (architect N. M. Molokov, 1937), the pavilion of the Byelorussian SSR at the exhibition of the All-Union Agricultural Exhibition (V. N. Simbirtsev, B. G. Barkhin, 1939) in Moscow, as well as the Fire Protection Technical School (architect L. Yu. Galperin, A. I. Knyazev, 1938) in Leningrad. [16] After the revolution, the geometrized order turned out to be not just an artistic idea, as in the 1910s, but a form of survival. This style confirmed solidarity with the new government. And this, it seems, required Fomin to call his works "red dorica" and "proletarian classics". [10, p. 181] [17] The style of the side facades of the library. IN AND. Lenin is obviously built into the evolution of the Art Deco style - from the geometrized blades of Saarinen (station in Helsinki, 1910) to American samples, for example, the building of the Shakespeare Library in Washington, P. Cret, from 1929. And for the first time this composition of a high ant portico and a side Shchuko and Gelfreich proposed a facade designed with blades back in 1924, when they were working in Leningrad on a small building of the Volkhovskaya hydroelectric station. [18] The pendulum movement in the evolution of Soviet architecture is also noted by BM Kirikov [3, p. 96–103] [19] V. L. Hait in his analysis of the architecture of the 1910s and 1930s refers to this neoclassical version of Art Deco - individual works by O. Perret, the style of pavilions built in Paris for the 1937 exhibition, works by I.. A. Fomin and other Soviet architects, as well as the buildings of P. Crete in the USA, M. Piacentini in Italy, etc. [9, p. 211, 212] [20] A whole layer of buildings with the use of ante order can be found in Italy, first of all, the administration (architect M. Piacentini, 1933) and propylaea (A. Foschini, 1932) of the University in Rome. Such are the palaces of justice in Palermo (G. Rapisardi, 1938), Latina (O. Frezotti, 1936), Catanier (F. Fichera, 1937), Palazzo Littorio in Bergamo (A. Bergonzo, 1939), as well as various objects in Bolzano, Genoa, Naples, Forlì, etc., separate buildings of the Roman ensemble EUR (1939). [21] In Paris, an elongated geometrized order was solved - the Theater of O. Perret at the exhibition in 1925, the Palais Port-Dore (A. Laprad, 1931), the Museum of the Ministry of Public Works (O. Perret, 1936), the Museum of Modern Art (1937) and the Palais de Chaillot (1937). These stylistic parallels between the Russian architecture of the 1930s and the style of the exhibition in Paris in 1937 were also noted by V. L. Hight. [9, p. 221] [22] So the masterpieces of E. A. Levinson steel: an ensemble of residential buildings on Ivanovskaya Street near the Lomonosovskaya metro station (since 1937) and a residential building for employees of the NKVMF on Petrovskaya Embankment (1938) in Leningrad, as well as a pavilion of the North-Western Region at the All-Union Agricultural Exhibition in Moscow (1939, not preserved). Note that the indirect influence on Levinson's style of those years from the projects of Ivan Alexandrovich Fomin (1872-1936) - the Palace of Transport Technology in Moscow (1932) and the theater in Ashgabat (1934) is easy to explain: his long-term co-author E. A. Levinson was Igor Ivanovich Fomin (1904-1989). [23] Note that this theme of a caisson volume, decorated with obelisks (like Rudnev's in the building of the People's Commissariat of Defense on Arbatskaya, 1933), was proposed by Shchuko and Gelfreich in the fourth round of the DS competition (1932). [24] Windows-caissons first appeared in the theater building on the Champs Elysees in Paris (O. Perret, 1910) and the Villa Kovarovic, as a revolutionary example of cubism in the architecture of Prague (J. Chohol, 1912). In the 1920s, this technique began to solve large volumes, as if covering them with a checkered fabric, such are the projects of Perret and Vago at the competition for the building of the League of Nations in Geneva (1928). And for the first time the idea of a completely coffered volume was proposed by Joseph Vago at the Chicago Tribune competition (1922). [25] In 1934, the longitudinal facade of the NKTP, facing the Red Square and designed with a stepped base, colonnade and caissons, was a response to Bulle's project, the interior of the Library (1785). In 1935, this image was formed by the "eponymous" interior of the metro station "Biblioteka im. IN AND. Lenin "(architect AI Gontskevich). [26] The risk of using an ascetic interstyle order was in its particular anemia, and this was precisely what made it different from the "emotional temperature" of the classics. However, realizing this danger of loss of expressiveness and variability, Fomin in the early 1930s found new stylistic channels - expressive solutions of the NKTP project (1934), and then the brutal rust of the People's Commissariat in Kiev (1936). [27] So the work of the employees of the Third Workshop of the Moscow City Council headed by IA Fomin was close to Art Deco. Such were the works of G. T. Krutikov and V. S. Popov, created at the junction of neoclassicism and art deco - the project of the building of the Sound cinema Mezhrabpomfilm and the Park Kultury metro station (1935), the ribbed projects of A. N. Dushkin and K. I. Solomonov - Houses of Radio and the Institute of Marx-Engels-Lenin, M. A. Minkus - the building of the government garage on Kotelnicheskaya emb., As well as the work of K. I. Solomonov, solved by ribs and caissons - the project of the Communication House in Sochi, and the building of the automatic telephone exchange of the Frunzensky district, built on the Garden Ring in Moscow. [28] Published over a period of two months, ten critical articles from early 1936 were directed not just against the ideas of the avant-garde or art deco, but against the creative initiative itself. As indicated by A. I. Morozov, these were - "Confusion instead of music" (January 28), "Ballet falsehood" (February 6), "Against formalism and" leftist ugliness "in art" (February 14), "Stairway leading to nowhere" (February 18), "Cacophony in Architecture" (February 20), "On the Formalists and the" Backward "Viewer" (March 1), "On the Patchwork Artists" (March 4), "Away from Life" (March 6), "Formalist Antics in painting "(February 24)," On naturalism in painting "(March 26). At the end of the year, they were supplemented by "Soviet Artists and the Theme" and "Against Formalism in Art." [7, p. 38]
Bibliography
- Bass V. G., Petersburg neoclassical architecture of the 1900-1910s in the mirror of competitions: word and form.- St. Petersburg: Publishing House of the European University in St. Petersburg, 2010.
- Goryunov V. S., Architecture of the Modern Era: Concepts. Directions. Craftsmen / V. S. Goryunov, M. P. Tubli. - SPb.: Stroyizdat, 1992
- Kirikov BM, “Modernized neoclassicism of Leningrad. Italian and Germanic parallels. "Small capital". 2010, no. 1.
- Leningrad House of Soviets. Architectural competitions of the 1930s. - SPb.: GMISPb. 2006.
- Lisovsky V. G. Nikolay Vasiliev. From modern to modernism. / Lisovskiy V. G., Gasho R. M. / SPb.: Kolo, 2011.
- Minkus M. A., I. A. Fomin. / M. A. Minkus, N. A. Pekareva, M.: State publishing house of literature on construction and architecture, 1953.
- Morozov A. I., The End of Utopia. From the history of art in the USSR in the 1930s. Galart, M, 1995
- Works of architectural and design workshops for 1934. Issue 3, Moscow: 1936
- Khayt V. L., "Art Deco: Genesis and Tradition" // On architecture, its history and problems. Collection of scientific articles / Preface. A. P. Kudryavtseva. - M.: Editorial URSS, 2003.
- Khan - Magomedov S. O. Ivan Fomin. - M.: S. E. Gordeev, 2011
- Borsi F., The Monumental Era: European Architecture and Design 1929-1939 - Rizzoli, 1987
- Lambrichs A., Jozsef Vago. Un Architecte Hongrois Dans La Tourmente Europeenne - Bruxelles: AAM Editions, 2003.
